SCHINDLER INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') impugning the judgment of the Commissioner dated 11.4.2012 which has allowed the claim petition filed by respondent no.2 herein who is the widow of the deceased workman/employee Vijay Singh who died in an accident arising out of and in the course of employment pertaining to maintenance and running of the escalator owned by respondent no.1 herein and contracted for running and maintenance to the appellant herein.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the deceased Vijay Singh was the employee of the appellant and he died on account of electricity current which leaked from the switch of the foot light of the foot over bridge when the deceased Vijay Singh went on to switch off the light.

(3.) NO doubt, the Commissioner has decided the case by reference to only pleadings and existing documents, and no oral evidence has been led by the parties, however, it is well settled law that strict provisions of CPC and Evidence Act do not apply to proceedings before the Commissioner as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Om Parkash Batish Vs. Ranjit Kaur @ Ranbir Kaur & Ors. (2008) 12 SCC 212. I put a specific query to counsel for the appellant as to whether the appellant had filed an application before the Commissioner to lead evidence or that a ground has been raised in this appeal that the appellant was prevented from leading evidence, however, it is conceded that no such ground was raised in this appeal that appellant was prevented from leading evidence and nor any such application was filed before the Commissioner. Therefore, Commissioner has rightly held on the basis of existing record that death of deceased Vijay Singh happened when he went to switch off the light of the foot over bridge.